The proactive role of academia as opinion-makers in any social space is the most effective tool for any society or a state. The unpacking of existing social and political issues for thorough analysis in order to come up with certain prognosis is imperative for all forms of human collectivity -- to keep pace with the changing time.

It is not without reason that academics are the most valued human resource in any knowledge economy (the countries relying on their indigenously-produced knowledge system). In most cases, they are the main catalyst for change since the dawn of the modern era.

The central theme of this article is that the only panacea for the general socio-political malaise that any polity confronts can only be resolved through academia of that particular space. Arnold Toynbee calls it in relatively broader terms as ‘creative minority’. In the case of its sheer absence or if it is in a state of being torpid, the polity in question cannot escape the doomsday scenario.

When intellectual inertia and stasis sets in, it starts creeping into the inner recesses of the society, subjecting it to all sorts of maladies -- be it corruption, terrorism, or energy crises which are a mere outcome of it. Official circles generally complain about the ineptness of the academics; therefore, the consultancy business is usually diverted to foreign experts.

During General Pervez Musharraf’s reign, the much-hyped devolution plan was put together by the ‘Donor Financed Consultants’; hence, it failed to yield the desired results. One can argue with high degree of assurance that foreign consultants are ignorant of the local socio-cultural dynamics and also of the historical process which produces sensibilities peculiar to the region. Consequently, the policy framework which had gone through the stages of evolution in a different socio-historical setting is enforced on a country like Pakistan with catastrophic ramifications.

The main proposition, therefore, is that academics having locally embedded roots and connections may bail us out of our problems.

What, however, is of utmost importance is the acceptance of Pakistani academia by the people wielding power. Then, of course, their abilities must be trusted so that they could be tried.

Besides reposing trust in the academics, a few other preconditions have to be met, too. The first and foremost is the requisite freedom of thought as well as of expression which is absolutely vital for the enhancement of the academic’s intellectual prowess.

The vibrant public sphere, which is the most effective tool for social evolution and epistemic advancement, is formed only in a social dispensation which has no bar on alternative thinking. Closed societies are at best good imitators but creativity without any exception steers clear of it.

By putting forward the Chinese instance, someone may dispute this assertion. But what is important is to note that China is a country where individual’s obligations are starkly disproportionate to its rights. As a collectivity of humans, it undoubtedly looks enviable but from the perspective of the individual, it is not.

Having said that, it is surprising how much China is spending on facilitating its youth to travel abroad for the purpose of education. Many of them travel to UK and USA just to learn English and to do degrees in cultural studies. It is, therefore, pleaded that in Pakistan the regulation (you may read it as intrusion) on educational institutions ought to be substantially curtailed.

Indoctrination whether in religious form or for fomenting nationalism is extremely detrimental, a fact that is well corroborated. Academia is a worthy national asset but only if it is equipped with critical sensibility through which it is enabled to analyse the existing situation and provide direction for the future.

The issue worth our consideration is the disconnect between our academia and the policy formulation which has already been spelt out. But what has not been said is that some sort of an institutional nexus needs to be forged between the public sector universities and those responsible for policy formulation. That will certainly work towards providing academics some stakes in the state apparatus. Currently, they are sitting at the margins like nonentities.

A big barrier in the way of academia to assume any role is couched in its inability to express itself in an effective manner. Inadequacy of the language needed in the very act of articulation is quite an important factor. Thus, academics themselves need to learn the art of expressing themselves.

Then come ideological inhibitions. Some freakish (in a good sense) voices do try to make themselves heard but they are readily silenced one way or the other. What transpires as a consequence is that intellect gets regimented which is the main cause for self-alienation.

Now the claim of ownership towards the state of Pakistan must transcend the very narrow confines of the army, bureaucracy and politician triumvirate. Equally important is the fact that actual freedom is attained only through producing your own knowledge, particularly in the realm of social sciences and humanities. That is through such disciplines that the questions not only of identity and culture are addressed but the very existence of a nation state, as Pakistan is, is preserved. Thus, we must understand that fact. The earlier we understand it the better it is.